Tweet
Detrimental: Sheriff Arpaio Asks Judge To Accelerate Appeal; Obama's Illegal Executive Actions
Birther Report
1/7/2015
Excerpt:
Attorney Larry Klayman on behalf of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is asking a judge to accelerate the appeal of the lawsuit seeking to halt Obama's illegal immigration action telling the judge there's no time to waste.
The case was originally dismissed by an Obama appointed judge for lack of standing.
Freedom Watch update:
In related news a democrat and activists are angry Sheriff Arpaio is suing Obama over illegal immigration complaining he's wasting taxpayer dollars even though Attorney Klayman is litigating the case pro bono.
Excerpt via Arizona Central:
It appears by all accounts the overwhelming majority of people that take issue with Sheriff Arpaio's illegal immigration enforcement are elected democrats, lefty political activists, and media personal.
........................................
View the complete Birther Report presentation at:
http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/01...sks-judge.html
Birther Report
1/7/2015
Excerpt:
Attorney Larry Klayman on behalf of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is asking a judge to accelerate the appeal of the lawsuit seeking to halt Obama's illegal immigration action telling the judge there's no time to waste.
The case was originally dismissed by an Obama appointed judge for lack of standing.
Freedom Watch update:
Arpaio/Klayman ask D.C. Circuit to accelerate appeal of Obama executive order immigration case
Tell Judges That There is No Time to Waste
(Washington, D.C., January 6, 2015). Today, Larry Klayman, counsel for Sheriff Joe Arpaio, moved the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit Case No. 14-5325) to accelerate the appeal of a lower court order, issued by Judge Beryl Howell, an Obama appointee. On December 23, 2014, Judge Howell dismissed Arpaio's lawsuit (14-cv-1966) on the professed grounds that it is simply a political dispute and that Arpaio could not show standing. To the contrary, however, Klayman and Arpaio assert that the lower court seriously erred and that a preliminary injunction should quickly issue to prevent irreparable harm from President Obama's unconstitutional executive actions granting amnesty to roughly 5 million illegal aliens. Time is of the essence, since the brunt of Obama's amnesty will occur in February.
Klayman and Arpaio had this to say at the time of filing this motion:
"As the old adage goes, justice delayed is justice denied. The D.C. Circuit has a duty to move quickly to protect the citizens of Arizona and the nation from the harmful effects of allowing for the continued horde of illegal criminal aliens who will not now be deported to remain in the United States, as was required under existing law before Obama issued his executive actions. And, an early decision will also allow the Supreme Court discretion to review Obama's executive actions at the earliest practicable time."
According to Sheriff Arpaio: "This act by the President will have a serious detrimental impact on my carrying out the duties and responsibilities for which I am encharged as Sheriff. Specifically, if a preliminary injunction is not swiftly entered, Obama's illegal executive actions will severely strain and cause severe harm to our crime-fighting resources, both in manpower and financially, necessary to protect the citizens I was elected to serve."
For more information, contact daj142182@gmail.com or (424) 274-2579. To view the motion, go to www.freedomwatchusa.org.
Tell Judges That There is No Time to Waste
(Washington, D.C., January 6, 2015). Today, Larry Klayman, counsel for Sheriff Joe Arpaio, moved the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit Case No. 14-5325) to accelerate the appeal of a lower court order, issued by Judge Beryl Howell, an Obama appointee. On December 23, 2014, Judge Howell dismissed Arpaio's lawsuit (14-cv-1966) on the professed grounds that it is simply a political dispute and that Arpaio could not show standing. To the contrary, however, Klayman and Arpaio assert that the lower court seriously erred and that a preliminary injunction should quickly issue to prevent irreparable harm from President Obama's unconstitutional executive actions granting amnesty to roughly 5 million illegal aliens. Time is of the essence, since the brunt of Obama's amnesty will occur in February.
Klayman and Arpaio had this to say at the time of filing this motion:
"As the old adage goes, justice delayed is justice denied. The D.C. Circuit has a duty to move quickly to protect the citizens of Arizona and the nation from the harmful effects of allowing for the continued horde of illegal criminal aliens who will not now be deported to remain in the United States, as was required under existing law before Obama issued his executive actions. And, an early decision will also allow the Supreme Court discretion to review Obama's executive actions at the earliest practicable time."
According to Sheriff Arpaio: "This act by the President will have a serious detrimental impact on my carrying out the duties and responsibilities for which I am encharged as Sheriff. Specifically, if a preliminary injunction is not swiftly entered, Obama's illegal executive actions will severely strain and cause severe harm to our crime-fighting resources, both in manpower and financially, necessary to protect the citizens I was elected to serve."
For more information, contact daj142182@gmail.com or (424) 274-2579. To view the motion, go to www.freedomwatchusa.org.
In related news a democrat and activists are angry Sheriff Arpaio is suing Obama over illegal immigration complaining he's wasting taxpayer dollars even though Attorney Klayman is litigating the case pro bono.
Excerpt via Arizona Central:
Fact Check: Gallego mostly right on migrant lawsuit
[....]
But Larry Klayman, Arpaio's attorney in the case against Obama, said there is no cost to Arizonans for the most recent lawsuit. That's because he is working for free.
"(T)hat case is not costing Arizona taxpayers anything. It's pro bono," he wrote in an e-mail to The Arizona Republic.
Organizers of the immigration protest said if county and state funds aren't in play, there's still a cost.
Maricopa County Supervisor-elect Steve Gallardo reiterated that taxpayers paid dearly for past lawsuits involving Arpaio and that the sheriff now is spending energy challenging the federal government instead of focusing on his county duties. Raquel Terán, the Arizona director for Mi Familia Vota, added that there is a cost to federal taxpayers for U.S. Department of Justice attorneys to defend the president's executive action and for the U.S. District judge to hear the case.
The exact federal cost is unclear. However, the hearing lasted less than a day and the judge quickly ruled, so compared with lengthier cases, the cost was likely minimal.
Gallego spokesman Andy Barr said Arpaio's lawsuit is a waste even if he has a pro-bono attorney.
"When it comes to wasting taxpayer dollars on misguided political stunts, Joe Arpaio's birther quest alone would put him in the hall of fame," Barr said. "Just because Arpaio found a lawyer to carry his water for free doesn't mean he isn't wasting taxpayer money or the valuable time and resources of our judicial system."
BOTTOM LINE: Gallego and the other activists were right that legal disputes involving Brewer and Arpaio have cost county and state taxpayers millions of dollars. But the Arpaio lawsuit against Obama did not, because his attorney provided his services for free.
Gallego was not specific about which pot of taxpayer money he believed was being wasted by Arpaio's lawsuit, though the tone of the protest implied that activists were concerned about costs to Arizonans. [...] Arizona Central.
[....]
But Larry Klayman, Arpaio's attorney in the case against Obama, said there is no cost to Arizonans for the most recent lawsuit. That's because he is working for free.
"(T)hat case is not costing Arizona taxpayers anything. It's pro bono," he wrote in an e-mail to The Arizona Republic.
Organizers of the immigration protest said if county and state funds aren't in play, there's still a cost.
Maricopa County Supervisor-elect Steve Gallardo reiterated that taxpayers paid dearly for past lawsuits involving Arpaio and that the sheriff now is spending energy challenging the federal government instead of focusing on his county duties. Raquel Terán, the Arizona director for Mi Familia Vota, added that there is a cost to federal taxpayers for U.S. Department of Justice attorneys to defend the president's executive action and for the U.S. District judge to hear the case.
The exact federal cost is unclear. However, the hearing lasted less than a day and the judge quickly ruled, so compared with lengthier cases, the cost was likely minimal.
Gallego spokesman Andy Barr said Arpaio's lawsuit is a waste even if he has a pro-bono attorney.
"When it comes to wasting taxpayer dollars on misguided political stunts, Joe Arpaio's birther quest alone would put him in the hall of fame," Barr said. "Just because Arpaio found a lawyer to carry his water for free doesn't mean he isn't wasting taxpayer money or the valuable time and resources of our judicial system."
BOTTOM LINE: Gallego and the other activists were right that legal disputes involving Brewer and Arpaio have cost county and state taxpayers millions of dollars. But the Arpaio lawsuit against Obama did not, because his attorney provided his services for free.
Gallego was not specific about which pot of taxpayer money he believed was being wasted by Arpaio's lawsuit, though the tone of the protest implied that activists were concerned about costs to Arizonans. [...] Arizona Central.
It appears by all accounts the overwhelming majority of people that take issue with Sheriff Arpaio's illegal immigration enforcement are elected democrats, lefty political activists, and media personal.
........................................
View the complete Birther Report presentation at:
http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/01...sks-judge.html